A number of dental implants are disclosed in various United States patents, U.S. Pat. No. 3,436,826 to Edelman discloses a dental implant in which a pin is adapted to be inserted transversely through the mandible in such a way as to receive a perpendicular threaded fastener. A drill jig may be temporarily positioned over the mandible, but the jig forms no part of the permanent implantation. U.S. Pat. No. 4,121,340 to Patrick discloses a dental implant having a bladevent body and a relatively wide straddling subperiosteal frame; and abutment post appends the subperiosteal frame and thus is only indirectly attached to the bladevent body, to prevent unwanted invagination of the oral epithelium. U.S. Pat. No. 4,084,318 to McEachern discloses a method wherein a cavity is cut into the mandible or maxilla from either side. A second bore is then drilled vertically into the bone structure to intersect the first-formed cavity. A rectangular anchor base is laterally inserted into the first cavity and a shank and an anchor post are mounted thereupon. The non-circular cross section of the rectangular anchor base resists torsional strain applied to a shank mounted therein.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,531,916 to Scantlebury et al. discloses a dental implant having a root structure, a cervical segment, and a porous gingival interface; this interface, which is made of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene, facilitates tissue ingrowth and discourages bacterial penetration. U.S. Pat. No. 4,244,689 to Ashman discloses polymeric plastic implants, for endosteal and periosteal applications, in which nontoxic leachable substances such as sodium chloride crystals having a controlled particle size are incorporated in the prepolymer-liquid monomer mixture prior to implantation. After heat polymerization without an initiator, the leachable substance is removed from the plastic implant to provide porosity for tissue ingrowth.
Prior art devices fail to provide maximum stability, unfortunately, because the implant typically integrates only one structure with the maxilla or mandible and thus promotes only limited bony union. A need remains, therefore, for a dental implant which not only provides an implant receptor, in the general manner of prior art devices, but which also provides maximum stability and permanence as a result of both mechanical and bony union at a plurality of maxillary/mandibular sites.